Well why didn’t you say that’s what you were doing Patrick..
Have a look at this link (5 pages worth) and all will become as clear as mud…well, it will help really!
At least in part, this article explains a bit of how MacTavish’s arms came to be what they are:
http://www.electricscotland.com/webclans/m/mactavish_pr.htm
1) They ARE Western Scottish Quarters (whatever that means).
2) The gyronny is NOT Campbell, but MacDuinne from which both the Campbells and MacTavishes descend. So the gyronny is a nod to ancient ancestors.
3) The original grant of the chiefly arms is from 1793 and the Lord Lyon who granted them was a Campbell (and it’s believed that he granted them for a ‘special circumstance’).
4) The historical chiefly arms of MacTavish (gyronny of eight Azure and Argent) were never registered but scholarship has recently proven that MacTavish was one of the 69 original highland clans.
Martin:
Thanks for that.
Patrick Williams wrote:
At least in part, this article explains a bit of how MacTavish’s arms came to be what they are:
http://www.electricscotland.com/webclans/m/mactavish_pr.htm
snip// but scholarship has recently proven that MacTavish was one of the 69 original highland clans.
If this is so, and MacTavish was indeed one of the original highland clans*, then it is all the more strange that no Lord Lyon has seen fit to grant supporters. Many chiefs do not have supporters and this is usually because they are not the chiefs of large and substantial clans but one would have thought that being the chief of one of the original 69 clans might have qualified the petitioner for supporters…. oh well.
* I would like to see the alleged proof that has "recently" come to light.
Martin
J Duncan of Sketraw wrote:
Well why didn’t you say that’s what you were doing Patrick..
Have a look at this link (5 pages worth) and all will become as clear as mud…well, it will help really!
Thanks, John, I’ll look at this link straightaway.
The Baronage Press Web site states, about the supporter issue:
"Dunardry has been recognised by the Lord Lyon as Chief of MacTavish (even though his 18th century predecessor did not then find evidence to support such a claim, if such a claim was made at all), but the Lord Lyon has not allowed Dunardry supporters, which is within his power and for which ‘the Chiefs of considerable Families’ qualify."
Martin, do all of the rest of the original 69 who have chiefs have supporters?
Good Father Archer, that is a very nice website that you have a hyperlink to; I really enjoyed the site especially the section on the 4th Earl. It is all very interesting. Thanks. 
John, is there any word out as to why he was not granted the other additaments? Is it, as some have suggested and which might well be true, that the door is being left open for a future chief other than the current one? If so, why would any Lyon grant the status of chief if he had such doubts in the first place? I know I am rather ignorant of these things Scottish, but it seems to me if you are unsure why not play it safe and say nothing, as in not recognize at all?
Patrick, John’s link is a good place for West Highland Heraldry. However, do not buy into either the heraldic [removed]art as shown), as there are several errors, or the genealogical connections, also several errors, in the “Irish Connection†section and most certainly pay no attention to Mr. Campbell’s off-colored remark about the Irish, “as always†upsetting the apple-cart. Otherwise a great source of West Highland Heraldry.
Donnchadh wrote:
...is there any word out as to why he was not granted the other additaments?
Perhaps the overall costs were too dear for him? I recall reading the correspondences between the newly discovered MacTavish and Lyon. MacTavish was turning down the chiefship because everything would cost too much money and he couldn’t be bothered with it at his stage in life. Lyon implored he accept—and went on to explain (as I recall) that really he could not refuse the chiefship because it was a matter of genealogy; Lyon then suggested MacTavish form a clan association which would be responsible for the Letters Patent, travel to Highland Games, etc. saying words to the effect, "afterall, that’s what all the other clan chiefs do."
Therefore ... I conject that MacTavish got a bare-bones Letters Patent.
—Guy
Donnchadh wrote:
John, is there any word out as to why he was not granted the other additaments? Is it, as some have suggested and which might well be true, that the door is being left open for a future chief other than the current one? If so, why would any Lyon grant the status of chief if he had such doubts in the first place? I know I am rather ignorant of these things Scottish, but it seems to me if you are unsure why not play it safe and say nothing, as in not recognize at all?
I think Guy may have hit one of he answers on the head ‘Cost’.
As to the other, I am sure more learned Scots heraldists will give you a better answer than I but there has been the cases in the past where the ‘door has been left open’ in case another claimant pops his head up. I think however there is a sort of time period involved, within 10 years I think, after that the claim would be substantiated.
Thanks Guy and John.
So, I thought that this open door period is when they called the petitioner a ‘captain’ of some kind. I must admit that I am woefully ignorant of these things Scottish. And I really shouldn’t be, as I have Scotts-Irish (O’Meskel-McLain with the McLain out of Co. Down) in me along with my Norman-Irish (Hyde) and native-Irish (MacGoff and O’Connell; although the O’Connell is really O’Connell-Pacheco, so there is a bit of Spanish in there as well…long story…). Anyway the Scotts and Irish are really so alike even though we are so different. I really, really need to start learning more about the Scottish.
I like the Lyon’s idea of forming a clan society and using the funds to come up with the grant money et al. I mean what a way to get a society going. And in turn the chief would be obligated to go out and do things with different societies around the globe. It is a great idea because it brings awareness of the clan to places it might lie dormant so to speak.
The Irish really, really could learn a thing or two form our Scottish cousins in these matters … sigh …
[QUOTE=Donnchadh
John’s link is a good place for West Highland Heraldry. However, do not buy into either the heraldic [removed]art as shown), as there are several errors, or the genealogical connections, also several errors, in the “Irish Connection†section and most certainly pay no attention to Mr. Campbell’s off-colored remark about the Irish, “as always†upsetting the apple-cart. Otherwise a great source of West Highland Heraldry.
Denny, I only believe half of what I read and almost nothing of what I hear. Actually, Mr. C’s ‘off-color’ remark was aimed at the Scottish, not the Irish. The apple-cart that the Irish upset is the Scottish belief that the charges commonly used in Western Highlands Quartering are their (the Scots’) invention.
Besides, I’m of Irish ancestry, too and I know we love kicking over the apple cart. Usually while we’re drinking, eating potatoes and step-dancing with the leprechauns! :rolleyes:
ROFL…Patrick…ROFL!
There are several people who are recognized as clan chiefs by Lyon Court that don’t rate supporters. My understanding is that it has to do with the prominence of the family back when. The eventual recognition of MacTavish was, as I recall, the subject of some controversy, because there was apparently little to no evidence that the house headed by MacTavish of Dunardry had ever really been a significant entity back when clans meant something.
Thomas Innes of Learney was keen on "reviving" the clan system (with himself as Lord Lyon being the ultimate arbiter of who was or wasn’t a chief) and invented a number of "rules" that have been the bane of Scottish heraldic scholarship for years (my opinion, shared by a select few others who do not worship at his shrine), and he might very well have been willing to grant supporters to the MacTavish, but perhaps his son and successor-once-removed was not.
RE: comment a bit earlier that Dunardy’s standard or guidon didn’t have a forked tail. IIRC Lyon (Innes anyway) used forked tails for baronial lairds (including those chiefs who were also barons) and rounded tails for non-baronial lairds or chiefs.
That’s my recollection anyway, subject to correction as needed.